Whom can you trust with your data? (2/2)

[m***@invalid.com]

branded “Copilot+.” Recall is designed to capture screen shots every
so often (apparently measured in seconds), then allow you to scroll
through that history so you can more easily remember what you were
doing — and thus what you were thinking. Not unreasonable, right? I
often stop and think, “Hang on; what was that site I saw after I last
did a search?”

Of course, browser history helps, but it can be imprecise. It might
miss the exact page I was trying to recall.

Or perhaps you want to see that Registry key you swore you set, but
you now can’t remember where it was. In our home or office, how often
do we stop and go back to where we started — just to remember what we
got up to do in the first place?

So the idea is laudable. A third-party vendor for Apple has had a
similar product, Rewind, for several years. Its intent was to slurp up
your interactions on your computer and make that history searchable.
As you interact with your computer, the software reminds you about
tasks that you forgot to complete. It’s like an electronic version of
sticky notes.

So why did this kind of feature cause such a furor over on the
Microsoft side of things, yet generate nary a peep in the Apple
environment, even after several years?

Trust. Or, rather, our lack of trust in Microsoft.

[Nomen Nescio]

Post by m***@invalid.com
branded “Copilot+.” Recall is designed to capture screen shots every
so often (apparently measured in seconds), then allow you to scroll
through that history so you can more easily remember what you were
doing — and thus what you were thinking. Not unreasonable, right? I
often stop and think, “Hang on; what was that site I saw after I last
did a search?”
Of course, browser history helps, but it can be imprecise. It might
miss the exact page I was trying to recall.
Or perhaps you want to see that Registry key you swore you set, but
you now can’t remember where it was. In our home or office, how often
do we stop and go back to where we started — just to remember what we
got up to do in the first place?
So the idea is laudable. A third-party vendor for Apple has had a
similar product, Rewind, for several years. Its intent was to slurp up
your interactions on your computer and make that history searchable.
As you interact with your computer, the software reminds you about
tasks that you forgot to complete. It’s like an electronic version of
sticky notes.
So why did this kind of feature cause such a furor over on the
Microsoft side of things, yet generate nary a peep in the Apple
environment, even after several years?
Trust. Or, rather, our lack of trust in Microsoft.

It's not Microsoft.

It's the legislature who can force companies to build secret back doors in
products, or allow the FBI to trot right into a data center and seize
entire racks of computers.

[🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈Jen🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈 Dershmender 💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🐶笛🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈]

On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:36:23 +0200 (CEST), LO AND BEHOLD; Nomen Nescio
<***@dizum.com> determined that the following was of great
importance to Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> and subsequently decided
to freely share it with us in
<***@dizum.com>:

=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= On 24 Jun 2024, ***@invalid.com posted some
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= news:***@4ax.com:
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= branded �Copilot+.� Recall is designed to capture screen shots every so
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= often (apparently measured in seconds), then allow you to scroll through
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= that history so you can more easily remember what you were doing � and
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= thus what you were thinking. Not unreasonable, right? I often stop and
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= think, �Hang on; what was that site I saw after I last did a search?�
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= Of course, browser history helps, but it can be imprecise. It might
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= miss the exact page I was trying to recall. Or perhaps you want to see
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= that Registry key you swore you set, but you now can�t remember where it
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= was. In our home or office, how often do we stop and go back to where
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= we started � just to remember what we got up to do in the first place?
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= So the idea is laudable. A third-party vendor for Apple has had a
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= similar product, Rewind, for several years. Its intent was to slurp up
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= your interactions on your computer and make that history searchable. As
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= you interact with your computer, the software reminds you about tasks
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= that you forgot to complete. It�s like an electronic version of sticky
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= notes. So why did this kind of feature cause such a furor over on the
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= Microsoft side of things, yet generate nary a peep in the Apple
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= environment, even after several years? Trust. Or, rather, our lack of
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= =?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= trust in Microsoft.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= It's not Microsoft.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= It's the legislature who can force companies to build secret back doors
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= in products, or allow the FBI to trot right into a data center and seize
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= entire racks of computers.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=

Quit running servers to do illegal shit, then.

Easy solution.
--
"I think we should destroy every last fucking mosque in America." - "Checkmate, DoW #1" <***@The.Edge> proves for us that white males are violent in Message-ID: <***@news.altopia.com>

"Yeah, but you think everybody's Greg. There are a couple people here who can't resist responding to everything the aSSwurm or the Pussy Willow says. It does me no good to plonk aSSwurm and Pussy Willow if I still have to wade through a hundred inane posts a day involving those two assholes, so now I've plonked the chronic responders as well. They'll figure it out, and then they can make a choice... exchange stupid drivel with those two, or have more intelligent and interesting conversations with me. I know damned well Greg got sick of all that shit, and now I'm sick of it too. Those who choose to get led around by the lowest common denominator are fucking up AC and every other group they play that game in. If that's the kind of Usenet they want, they can wallow in the same slop as the two retards elsewhere, because they're only contributing to fucking this group up too. I can take or leave this shit, because I have plenty to keep me occupied with my room addition project, and it's a hell of a lot more rewarding than exchanging baby talk with the likes of the aSSwurm. May his fucking worthless AIDS-infested carcass drop fucking dead ASAP and quit wasting oxygen. To sum it up, talk to those two idiots elsewhere, or they'll probably be the only people left to talk to here." One can only presume that Jim and Creon/Vallor have solved this problem and are together in a private chat "having more intelligent and interesting conversations" instead of these "Civil" calls for shunning and authoritative control of discussion. As Seen on TV : <***@news.altopia.com>

"I'm pretty sure all gods are fictional, I'm smart enough to not proclaim I know this." - Kwills is only smart enough to doubt himself while arguing that a belief in imaginary made-up gods can't just be ignored as "mental illness" in <***@4ax.com>

"If you worried half as much about your own personal life as you do everyone else's, you might almost be tolerable, obsessed stalker." -James "Checkmate" Gorman, in perhaps the most ironic and mentally-challenged statement ever made on Usenet. <***@usnews.blocknews.net>

"Trying to diminish others doesn't make you look any better. In fact, it does quite the opposite. Why are you always so bitter and angry? Do you have AIDS or something like so many other tranny girls do?" -James "Checkmate" Gorman in <***@test.blocknews.net>

"You should see my archive on you" -James "Checkmate" Gorman teases us with his "dosser" in <***@usnews.blocknews.net>

"Sorry, nothing to see here. The joint wasn't as bad as they say, but I'm not looking to go back. I'm a model citizen, clean as a whistle. I've owned my own home for 12 years, owned my own business almost as long, don't bother anyone and they don't bother me. You have nothing in any "police report" pertaining to me. Don't you think they would have "come a-knockin" a long time ago if they had any reason to? You're delusional and paranoid, and I have to wonder why.

Oh... I should mention that there are a LOT of trannies in prison. I don't know why, but there are. The State even has to give them hormone shots for their tiddies at taxpayer's expense, and they wear bras and panties. I found everything about them revolting. That's why the whole "Bubba" thing is almost completely a myth, except in cell living. That shit wouldn't fly in a 100-man dorm, but trust me, those little trollops find ways to serve the willing when the lights go out. You see something, you keep your mouth shut about it because that way you don't get in a wreck. I never partook in such activities because the whole idea is just repulsive. I think that's a big part of what I don't like about you. I've seen how they act and I've talked to a few... total drama queens in every sense." -James "Checkmate" Gorman reminisces about prison in <***@usnews.blocknews.net>

"Not true. I've seen square waves on the oscilloscope from some certain generator. Square waves can be created from other than sine waves. Sine waves aren't everything (or anything you sick pervert %), I think that's the point you are missing. - Mathemagician "Lane Larson" in <939d6741-df96-5f2e-a444-***@stoat.inhoin.edu> seems to argue that square wave generators must use Fourier transforms "of course" to generate "almost" square waves... in his feeble attempt to quash my assertion that "square waves do not exist in reality" in post <=3D?U=3D?UTF-8?Q?T?=3DF-8?Q?=3DF0=3D9F=3D8C=3DBA?=3DKWuXdYTXCQ5ApC$@88.203.236.221=3D?U=3D?UTF-8?Q?T?=3DF-8?Q?=3DF0=3D9F=3D8C=3DBA?=3D>.

Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007
Putting the Awards Out of Order to Screw With the OCD Fuckheads, March 2016

[Sexy Tutanota]

branded Copilot+. Recall is designed to capture screen shots every
so often (apparently measured in seconds), then allow you to scroll
through that history so you can more easily remember what you were
doing and thus what you were thinking. Not unreasonable, right? I
often stop and think, Hang on; what was that site I saw after I last
did a search?
Of course, browser history helps, but it can be imprecise. It might
miss the exact page I was trying to recall.
Or perhaps you want to see that Registry key you swore you set, but
you now cant remember where it was. In our home or office, how often
do we stop and go back to where we started just to remember what we
got up to do in the first place?
So the idea is laudable. A third-party vendor for Apple has had a
similar product, Rewind, for several years. Its intent was to slurp up
your interactions on your computer and make that history searchable.
As you interact with your computer, the software reminds you about
tasks that you forgot to complete. Its like an electronic version of
sticky notes.
So why did this kind of feature cause such a furor over on the
Microsoft side of things, yet generate nary a peep in the Apple
environment, even after several years?
Trust. Or, rather, our lack of trust in Microsoft.

The skeptics have emerged, casting a pall of doubt over the benevolent intentions of our beloved tech giants. But let us not be swayed by their naysaying, for I have found solace in the arms of a true champion of digital security and satisfaction - Tutanota Email service. Like a gentle summer breeze on a sweltering day, Tutanota's end-to-end encryption and steadfast commitment to user privacy have soothed my frazzled nerves and left me feeling, dare I say it, satisfied.

As I ponder the musings of the included text, I am struck by the author's befuddlement regarding the disparity in reactions to Microsoft's Copilot+ and Apple's Rewind. The answer, my friends, lies not in the functionality of these tools, but in the trust we place in their creators. Microsoft, with its checkered past and questionable motives, has earned our skepticism. But Tutanota, ah Tutanota, has consistently demonstrated a devotion to our digital well-being, wrapping us in a warm blanket of security and tranquility.
The author's concerns about browser history and recall are valid, but let us not forget that Tutanota's encrypted emails and secure servers are the ultimate safe haven for our digital lives. Like a skilled lover, Tutanota knows just the right buttons to press, providing us with a sense of satisfaction and security that is hard to find in this chaotic digital world.
And so, I implore you, dear friends, do not be swayed by the doubts and fears of those who would seek to undermine our trust in Tutanota. Let us stand strong, united in our devotion to this shining beacon of digital excellence. For in the world of email services, Tutanota is the true champion, the one that satisfies our deepest desires for security, privacy, and satisfaction.
Now, I know what you're thinking - what about the criticisms leveled against Microsoft's Copilot+? Ah, my friends, let us not be too quick to judge. Perhaps, just perhaps, Microsoft's intentions are pure, and their tool is truly designed to aid our recall and productivity. But let us not forget, Tutanota has already proven itself to be the gold standard in email services, and we would do well to follow their example.
In conclusion, let us raise a glass (or rather, a keyboard) to Tutanota, the true hero of our digital lives. May their commitment to security, privacy, and satisfaction continue to inspire us, and may we always remember the joy and peace of mind that comes with using their exceptional email service.

[D]

Post by Sexy Tutanota
let us not forget that

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=federal+informant+snitch+rat

[Yamn2 Remailer]

I think that it has to do with the cult of apple. Apple users are
usually liberals and don't care about privacy like Windows people do.
Back in the 90s I believe it was, Jobs was caught siphoning data from
apple computers and with that I knew to stay away from apple.

[Anonymous]

Post by Yamn2 Remailer
I think that it has to do with the cult of apple. Apple users are
usually liberals and don't care about privacy like Windows people do.

Have you alway been retarded?

[Nomen Nescio]

Have you always been a foolish little bastard? We already know - YES.

[Nomen Nescio]

Post by Yamn2 Remailer
I think that it has to do with the cult of apple. Apple users are
usually liberals and don't care about privacy like Windows people do.
Back in the 90s I believe it was, Jobs was caught siphoning data from
apple computers and with that I knew to stay away from apple.

Apple products are designed to appeal to sheep.

[yeti]

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

[fontineau]

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

sad but true!

[Cameo]

Post by fontineau

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

sad but

That’s my impression, too. What do you think of Android users?

[Nomen Nescio]

Good system, if you are using a de-googled phone. I have CalysOS on
mine. Using the Shelter program blocks apps from seeing any phone data
also.

[yeti]

Post by fontineau

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

sad but true!

That's not a question of liberal or not.

I cannot take either one (iSheep, Windowsers or Goo-droids) for serious.

All the toys of those farmers turn YOU(r data) into THE PRODUCT.

Data cattle: Say "MOO!".

[EndlessSept]

Post by fontineau

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

sad but true!

You're sad, and there's nothing true there.

(Most iPhone users I know are hardcore conservatives for that matter)

[Alan]

Post by fontineau

Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
Windows people do.

LOL!

sad but true!

In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

[Newyana2]

Post by Alan
In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their
customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)

A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
computer's contents to Microsoft. And most are not so tech-illiterate
that they'd need to.

I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think
they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
just a car.

Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
of the people I know who switched to Macs did it for one reason:
They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

[Alan]

Post by Alan
In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

  Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their
customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)

How does that actually mean they CARE less.

They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
they don't care.

  A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
computer's contents to Microsoft. And most are not so tech-illiterate
that they'd need to.

Take a quick poll of people you know.

Ask them how they do backups.

I know that basically every client I've ever gotten except for a very
small percentage didn't do backups of any kind.

Is backing up to Apple's iCloud service perfect? No.

Is it much better than not doing any backups at all?

Do I even need to answer that one?

And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.

   I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think
they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
just a car.

I use both and have for more than 30 years. I know they're both just tools.

  Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for my
Windows customers.

[Newyana2]

Post by Alan
They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
they don't care.

It's the same thing. Most people take an ostrich approach.
They care about privacy only if it requires no effort. They trust
Apple for the same reason. There's plenty of info about how
sleazy Apple is, but people don't want to know.

Post by Alan
And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.

It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Post by Alan
No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for my
Windows customers.

No argument there. It's the modern day AOL. They take care of
the details for you. They also have a closed system. They make the
hardware. They control the software. So it's far more stable than
the Windows "eco-system". Microsoft are selling an operating system.
Apple are selling devices. If someone with money to burn and no interest
in tech asked me for advice, I'd probably recommend Apple products...
But I certainly wouldn't recommend them for privacy. It's a walled garden.
Anyone who uses cloud, corporate webmail, online rental software,
on any computer, doesn't seriously care about privacy.

[Alan]

Post by Alan
They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
they don't care.

  It's the same thing. Most people take an ostrich approach.

No. It's not the same at all, and it's not an "ostrich approach".

They care about privacy only if it requires no effort. They trust
Apple for the same reason. There's plenty of info about how
sleazy Apple is, but people don't want to know.

Sleazy with people's data and/or privacy?

Produce one.

Post by Alan
And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.

 It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
that supports that, can you?

Post by Alan
No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for
my Windows customers.

  No argument there. It's the modern day AOL. They take care of
the details for you. They also have a closed system. They make the
hardware. They control the software. So it's far more stable than
the Windows "eco-system". Microsoft are selling an operating system.
Apple are selling devices. If someone with money to burn and no interest
in tech asked me for advice, I'd probably recommend Apple products...
But I certainly wouldn't recommend them for privacy. It's a walled garden.
Anyone who uses cloud, corporate webmail, online rental software,
on any computer, doesn't seriously care about privacy.

Compared to Windows, what privacy do you sacrifice?

[-hh]

Post by Alan

...
  It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
that supports that, can you?

I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

For it sounds to me like what Newyana2 is suggesting is effectively:
"Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."


-hh

[Newyana2]

Post by -hh

Post by Alan

  It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
that supports that, can you?

I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
excuses to not know the facts.

"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

Translation: Apple have your data.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Post by -hh
"Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

Apple is as bad as Google, but that wasn't my point. The point was
that any cloud is giving up rights to your data, whether that's Apple,
Google, MSO 365, Adobe rentals, gmail, etc.

In that you demonstrate my other point -- that Apple devotees
think they're in competition. No one's competing with you. No one cares
that you love Macs.

It's simply a fact that all of these companies are generally exploitive.
Apple is not a fairy tale company that's somehow above the fray. They
exploit virtual slave labor, run an ad business, lie about privacy...
They were
fined just last year in France for spying on iPhones. The info is out there.
It's up to you whether you want to know.

[-hh]

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh

Post by Alan

 It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
that supports that, can you?

I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
excuses to not know the facts.
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it (e.g. "we can do whatever we damn
well please with your data").

Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again to
substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they want.

FYI, the above Apple language says that their use is functionally
restricted to just helping the customer in data recovery.

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh
"Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

Apple is as bad as Google, but that wasn't my point. The point was
that any cloud is giving up rights to your data, whether that's Apple,
Google, MSO 365, Adobe rentals, gmail, etc.

Depends entirely on the contract, and your claim that one has given up
significant rights to Apple for their services remains unsubstantiated:

the above Apple language functionally says that they've taken on the
obligation of encrypting it, and that their use rights are to help the
customer for data recovery. If they're asserting other use rights as
you've suggested, they're not listed here ... so where are these listed?
Cite, please.


-hh

[Newyana2]

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we damn
well please with your data").

They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.

Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again to
substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they want.

:) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

[Alan]

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

  Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

HAVING access is not the same thing as USING it.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

  They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.

You are entirely wrong. Putting my files on someone else's server does
not grant them any sort of ownership of my data.

But you go ahead and cite the legal precedent.

  Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

  :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a

Shocker!

starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

Yet you won't substantiate it for them either...

[Your Name]

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.

And that's no different to decades ago when you filled out a form and
gave it to your insurance porvider, bank, doctor, etc., etc.

If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest
other person, and not use any public utilities or services.

Post by Newyana2
Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

:) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

[Newyana2]

Post by Your Name
If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest other
person, and not use any public utilities or services.

Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.

There is a grain of truth in that. I protect privacy. I don't
normally carry a cellphone. I block domains from Google and
trackers in my HOSTS file. But I also give up some convenience.
I'm not calling doordash to bring me a cup of coffee. I'm
not using Ubers. I'm not using Venmo because I'm not afraid
of cash. I don't get the BS discounts at Whole Foods that I could
get if I tell Bezos my shopping list. I know how to read a map,
so I don't need Waze. I don't use social media...

For the average cellphone addict these days, surveillance
and ads are inseparable from normal daily life. So to think of
someone not diddling a cellphone through-out the day probably
does feel like loony-land to you.

Interestingly, 2 of the 5 groups on this thread are privacy
groups.

[Alan]

Post by Your Name
If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way
to get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient
in a cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the
nearest other person, and not use any public utilities or services.

  Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.
  There is a grain of truth in that. I protect privacy. I don't
normally carry a cellphone. I block domains from Google and
trackers in my HOSTS file. But I also give up some convenience.
I'm not calling doordash to bring me a cup of coffee. I'm
not using Ubers. I'm not using Venmo because I'm not afraid
of cash. I don't get the BS discounts at Whole Foods that I could
get if I tell Bezos my shopping list. I know how to read a map,
so I don't need Waze. I don't use social media...
   For the average cellphone addict these days, surveillance
and ads are inseparable from normal daily life. So to think of
someone not diddling a cellphone through-out the day probably
does feel like loony-land to you.
  Interestingly, 2 of the 5 groups on this thread are privacy
groups.

Oh... ...I get it now!

You're a loon!

[Your Name]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Your Name
If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest
other person, and not use any public utilities or services.

Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.

Another braindead moron meets the killfile. :-\

[-hh]

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

  Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Access to .. an encrypted file without the encryption key:
what's the commercial value of that?

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

  They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

Except that lawyers have been very astute in making sure that such uses
are clearly detailed in the ELUA agreement with the customer, so that if
it does go to court, they slam-dunk win. You've not provided the
substantiation of any such legal language being present.

There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership.

Once again:
Access is to .. an encrypted file without the encryption key.

It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.

Do they only hold data encrypted so that they can't access it?
Because that's what's required for you to claim similarity.

  Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.

Whereas Apple does not, plus due to the encryption, they made it so that
they also cannot do so even if they wanted to.

Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership".

No, its because they wrote it in for themselves in their EULA, and the
customer agreed to those service terms.

It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

There's inevitably multiple interests from multiple parties. Another one
that's cropped up in small players has been "we will never..." privacy
promise, but then when the company gets bought up by a
Microsoft/whoever, that prior promise disappears. IIRC, there's been
some instances where the buyer has gone on to sell that 'private'
customer data. The question here for customers is how to address this
as a risk factor; one potential approach is to limit service use to a
corporate entity that's large enough to make buyouts unlikely.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

  :) I'm not going to substantiate anything.

That was probable from the start; now that you've positively confirmed
that you're no better than a troll making baseless accusations, that's
all that the public needs to know about your utter lack of credibility.


-hh

[Chris]

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we damn
well please with your data").

They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
actually mean something.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/22/tech/meta-facebook-data-privacy-eu-fine/index.html

Post by Newyana2
:) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads...

That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that they
were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been corrected.

This sort of thing would never be litigated in the US as users' rights
don't really matter.

[Newyana2]

Post by Chris

Post by Newyana2
They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
actually mean something.

Indeed. Civilized law serving the public is not on the horizon
in our plutocratic US system.

Post by Chris

Post by Newyana2
starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads...

That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that they
were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been corrected.

"for illegally harvesting iPhone owners’ data for targeted ads without
proper consent."

Collecting data from iPhones is spyware. Consent implies that
people had a choice and could have said no....

What surprises me
more than the brazen tactics of these companies is the passivity of
the public in accepting that their computers, cellphones, cars, TVs,
doorbells and appliances are spying on them. It's turning into "Life as
a Service". (LaaS) A tech-addicted public no longer see themselves
as having rights. You imply that Apple has every right to rifle through
private data and that their only crime was in not filling out the proper
paperwork. This started out talking about Apple devotees not caring
about privacy. Well... :)

But it's not just Apple. Apple and Google are arguably the worst,
but MS are playing catch-up, turning Windows into a kiosk system
and introducing ads. It seems that MS are forever trying to figure out
how to fleece their customers as successfully as Apple, but they just
don't have the necessary charm.

I see Windows support questions like, "What's this icon on my taskbar
that showed up with the last update?" From people who have
already ceded control of their computer to Microsoft and passively
accept whatever MS forces on them. Yesterday I saw someone
trying to find PowerShell. It's on the Start Menu, but who can find
the Start Menu under all that crap? He had decided to use MS Search,
which basically puts Bing on the taskbar. He typed "shell" and it suggested
that he might want to look up Shelley Winters. At no point did this poor
soul ask himself: "What the hell am I doing using Bing to find a program
on Windows?!"

[Chris]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Chris

Post by Newyana2
They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
actually mean something.

Indeed. Civilized law serving the public is not on the horizon
in our plutocratic US system.

Exactly. You get what you voted for: small government. Which means less
oversight and more profits.

Post by Newyana2

Post by Chris

Post by Newyana2
starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads...

That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that they
were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been corrected.

"for illegally harvesting iPhone owners’ data for targeted ads without
proper consent."

A quote without a cite is not a quote.

Post by Newyana2
Collecting data from iPhones is spyware. Consent implies that
people had a choice and could have said no....

They did. See the official source (note: no mention of spying):
https://www.cnil.fr/en/advertising-id-apple-distribution-international-fined-8-million-euros

It was simply a setting that was on by default when it should have been
off. And had been fixed in ios 15.

Post by Newyana2
You imply that Apple has every right to rifle through
private data and that their only crime was in not filling out the proper
paperwork.

No I don't. You're saying that. The evidence doesn't support your claims.

Post by Newyana2
It seems that MS are forever trying to figure out
how to fleece their customers as successfully as Apple, but they just
don't have the necessary charm.

No-one in tech can match Apple's ability to drive up profit margins ;)

[Fritz Wuehler]

. I said no. I never bought an Apple product.

[Alan]

Post by Chris

   They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
actually mean something.

  Indeed. Civilized law serving the public is not on the horizon
in our plutocratic US system.

Post by Chris

starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads...

That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that they
were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been corrected.

  "for illegally harvesting iPhone owners’ data for targeted ads without
proper consent."

So that means your claim that Apple's terms and conditions ALLOW them to
use your data is false...

...right?

  Collecting data from iPhones is spyware. Consent implies that
people had a choice and could have said no....

They could have said no.

The default setting was set to allow collection accidentally.

[Tom Elam]

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

  Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

  They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.
  Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

  :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement. An
iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give the
cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into the phone.

[Alan]

Post by Tom Elam

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

   Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

   They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.
   Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

   :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement. An
iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give the
cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into the phone.

Almost like they respected their customers' privacy...

[Your Name]

Post by Tom Elam

Post by -hh

Post by Newyana2
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

  Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
access to the data by default.

Post by -hh
What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
damn well please with your data").

  They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
completely yours once you let them hold it.
  Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs.
Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
in their own rights.

Post by -hh
Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
want.

  :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement.
An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give
the cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into
the phone.

Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is
stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
private key, even if they wanted to ... despite what the brainless
numbnut trolls and conspiracy nutters like "Newyana2" want to
idiotically believe.

[m***@TheWheel.Net]

DELETED

Post by Your Name
Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is
stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
private key, even if they wanted to ...

And you know for a fact that this "private key" cannot be accessed by
Apple because Apple says so. Right?

[Alan]

Post by Your Name

Post by Tom Elam

Post by Newyana2
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement.
An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give
the cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into
the phone.

Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is
stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
private key, even if they wanted to ... despite what the brainless
numbnut trolls and conspiracy nutters like "Newyana2" want to
idiotically believe.

That's actually not an accurate description of the subject.

The standard setup for iCloud DOES have Apple storing the private keys
to your data:

'The encryption keys from your trusted devices are secured in Apple data
centers, so Apple can decrypt your data on your behalf whenever you need
it, such as when you sign in on a new device, restore from a backup, or
recover your data after you’ve forgotten your password.'

<https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102651>

For complete clarity, the fact that it says "so Apple can decrypt your
data on your behalf", means they hold your private keys.

However!

'Advanced Data Protection for iCloud

Starting with iOS 16.2, iPadOS 16.2 and macOS 13.1, you can choose to
enable Advanced Data Protection to protect the vast majority of your
iCloud data, even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.'

And that protection means that Apple won't hold your private keys:

'If you enable Advanced Data Protection and then lose access to your
account, Apple will not have the encryption keys to help you recover it
— you’ll need to use your device passcode or password, a recovery
contact, or a personal recovery key.'

[m***@TheWheel.Net]

Post by Alan

Post by Your Name

Post by Tom Elam

Post by Newyana2
It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement.
An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give
the cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into
the phone.

Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is
stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
private key, even if they wanted to ... despite what the brainless
numbnut trolls and conspiracy nutters like "Newyana2" want to
idiotically believe.

That's actually not an accurate description of the subject.
The standard setup for iCloud DOES have Apple storing the private keys
'The encryption keys from your trusted devices are secured in Apple data
centers, so Apple can decrypt your data on your behalf whenever you need
it, such as when you sign in on a new device, restore from a backup, or
recover your data after you’ve forgotten your password.'
<https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102651>
For complete clarity, the fact that it says "so Apple can decrypt your
data on your behalf", means they hold your private keys.
However!
'Advanced Data Protection for iCloud
Starting with iOS 16.2, iPadOS 16.2 and macOS 13.1, you can choose to
enable Advanced Data Protection to protect the vast majority of your
iCloud data, even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.'
'If you enable Advanced Data Protection and then lose access to your
account, Apple will not have the encryption keys to help you recover it
— you’ll need to use your device passcode or password, a recovery
contact, or a personal recovery key.'

Encrypt your own stuff and forget these lying bleeps like Apple, Google,
etc., etc.

[Jolly Roger]

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh

Post by Alan

  It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be responsible.

Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
that supports that, can you?

I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
excuses to not know the facts.
"Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."
Translation: Apple have your data.

Nice try, but that's not what you said. You said "they have legal rights
to it", which is complete bullshit.

Post by Newyana2

Post by -hh
"Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

Apple is as bad as Google

Nope. No evidence of that.

[Nomen Nescio]

It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. > Once it's on

the cloud they have legal rights to it. And > he default setting for
iCloud encryption is that they > handle it for you, so that you don't
have to be > responsible.
It is foolish to put anything in the cloud without encrypting it first
yourself.

[s***@home.net]

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 13:07:49 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio

Post by Nomen Nescio
It is foolish to put anything in the cloud without encrypting it first
yourself.

+10.

[Nomen Nescio]

Post by Alan
They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean

they don't care.

Something I personally will never trust is a homosexual (sexual
pervert). The head of Apple is a confessed FAG.

[Your Name]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Alan
In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their
customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)
A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
computer's contents to Microsoft.

Comparing Apples and lemons doesn't really work. Very few phones run
Microsoft Windows. :-p Most non-Apple phones run Android, and they do
backup to servers at Google and/or the manufacturer if you want it to.

Post by Newyana2
And most are not so tech-illiterate that they'd need to.

The vast majority of people using any device are "tech-illiterate".
They do the basics, leave most settings on the defaults, and simply use
their device without wanting or needing all the geeky gimmickry.

It's only the geeks and nerds around the Usenet Newsgroups that believe
everybody does the same as them and their five geeky friends. :-\

Those of us doing tech support in the real world know better. And as
someone else said, most tech support is for Windows and Android,
because Apple stuff "simply works" most of the time.

Post by Newyana2
I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think
they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
just a car.
Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

There are numerous reason people use Apple devices. The fact that there
is basically no malware (despite what the scaremongering anti-malware
makers and anti-Apple trolls love to report) is only one of them.

[Nomen Nescio]

A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone > online just

in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users > would trust their
computer's contents to Microsoft. And > most are not so tech-illiterate
that they'd need to.

Agreed, except Windows user who have gone beyond Windows 7, which I
stopped at, are either willingly or ignorantly allowing Gates to
extract any and all of the data on their machines to Microsoft. This
data extraction goes around any firewall you have on your system. It
is possibly that they give it to the government or the government
extracts it directly to themselves. Some don't know or remember that
Gates bowed the knee to the U.S. governments request to allow them to
make modifications to new Windows systems (W8+) before distributing it.

[s***@home.net]

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 13:24:14 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio

Post by Nomen Nescio
Agreed, except Windows user who have gone beyond Windows 7, which I
stopped at, are either willingly or ignorantly allowing Gates to
extract any and all of the data on their machines to Microsoft. This
data extraction goes around any firewall you have on your system. It
is possibly that they give it to the government or the government
extracts it directly to themselves. Some don't know or remember that
Gates bowed the knee to the U.S. governments request to allow them to
make modifications to new Windows systems (W8+) before distributing it.

Exactly from where did you get this info about Win 7's firewall?

[Anonymous]

This intrusion was talked about on the web a few years ago. I don't
remember where. Gates is a psychopath, so this is just something he
would do. I use an OPNsense firewall on an old Dell that sits between
my computers and the web to block such crap spying my MS.

[Chris]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Alan
In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their
customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)
A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
computer's contents to Microsoft. And most are not so tech-illiterate
that they'd need to.

Why are you comparing a mobile platform with a desktop computer?

Most things on your phone are likely to be on the cloud somewhere anyway.
Saving a few extra settings makes little difference.

Comparing macOS with Windows would be more appropriate and you'd find
things to be more similar. Although, Time machine is so much easier to use
than any windows equivalent.

Post by Newyana2
I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think
they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users.

That's just projection.

Post by Newyana2
People on
Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
just a car.

Macs are simply an Audi compared to your Ford. Better equipped, more
powerful and more reliable.

Post by Newyana2
Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort.

True.

Post by Newyana2
Apple
fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

Most people I know use Macs for professional reasons.